w w ap eP m e tr .X w UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS s er om .c Pre-U Certificate MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9769 HISTORY 9769/03 Paper 3 (US History Outlines, c. 1750–2000), maximum raw mark 90 This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements of the examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does not indicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners’ meeting before marking began, which would have considered the acceptability of alternative answers. Mark schemes must be read in conjunction with the question papers and the report on the examination. • Cambridge will not enter into discussions or correspondence in connection with these mark schemes. Cambridge is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2011 question papers for most IGCSE, Pre-U, GCE Advanced Level and Advanced Subsidiary Level syllabuses and some Ordinary Level syllabuses. Page 2 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 These banding definitions address Assessment Objectives 1, 2 and 4, and should be used in conjunction with the indicative content mark schemes for each question. Introduction (a) The banding definitions which follow reflect, and must be interpreted within the context of, the following general statement: Examiners should give their highest marks to candidates who show a ready understanding of the relevant material and a disciplined management of the discussion the question provokes. They should be impressed more by critical judgement, careful discrimination and imaginative handling than by a weight of facts. Credit should be given for evidence of a good historical intelligence and for good use of perhaps unremarkable material rather than for a stereotyped rehearsal of memorised information. (b) Examiners should use these banding definitions in combination with the paper-specific mark schemes. (c) It should go without saying that any explanation or judgement is strengthened if informed by the use of source material. (d) Examiners are also asked to bear in mind, when reading the following, that analysis sufficient for a mark in the highest band may perfectly legitimately be deployed within a chronological framework. Candidates who eschew an explicitly analytical response may well yet be able, by virtue of the very intelligence and pointedness of their selection of elements for a well-sustained and well-grounded account, to provide sufficient implicit analysis to justify a Band 2 mark. (e) The Band in which an essay is placed depends on a range of criteria. As a result, not all essays fall obviously into one particular Band. In such cases a ‘best-fit’ approach should be adopted with any doubt erring on the side of generosity. (f) In marking an essay, examiners should first place it in a Band and then fine-tune the mark in terms of how strongly/weakly the demands of the Band have been demonstrated. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 3 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Band 1: 25–30 The answer will be sharply analytical in approach and strongly argued. It will show that the demands of the question have been fully understood and that a conscious and sustained attempt has been made to respond to them in appropriate range and depth. It will be coherent and structured with a clear sense of direction. The focus will be sharp and persistent. Some lack of balance, in that certain aspects are covered less fully or certain arguments deployed less strongly than others, need not preclude a mark in this Band. The material will be wide-ranging and handled with the utmost confidence and a high degree of maturity. Historical explanations will be invariably clear, sharp and well developed and historical concepts fully understood. Where appropriate there will be conscious and successful attempts to engage with the historiography, to evaluate source material critically and to demonstrate an awareness of competing interpretations. Use of English will be clear and fluent with excellent vocabulary and virtually error-free. Band 2: 19–24 The answer will be characterised by an analytical and argued approach, although there may be the occasional passage which does not go beyond description or narrative. It will show that the demands of the question have been very well understood and that a determined attempt has been made to respond to them in appropriate range and depth. The essay will be coherent and clearly structured and its judgements will be effectively supported by accurate and relevant material. Some lack of rigour in the argument and occasional blurred focus may be allowed. Where appropriate there will be a conscious and largely successful attempt to engage with the historiography, to evaluate source material and to demonstrate an awareness of competing interpretations. The material will be wideranging, fully understood, confidently deployed and well controlled with high standards of accuracy. Historical explanations will be clear and well developed and there will be a sound understanding of historical concepts and vocabulary. Use of English will be highly competent, clear, generally fluent and largely error-free. Band 3: 13–18 The answer will attempt an analytical approach, although there will be passages which do not go beyond description or narrative. It will show that the demands of the question have been understood, at least in large part, and that a conscious attempt has been made to respond to them. There will be an effective focus on the terms of the question and, although in places this may break down, standards of relevance will be generally high. Although it may not be sustained throughout the answer, or always fully supported, there will be a recognisable sense of argument. The material will be clearly understood, with a good range, and organisation will be sound. There will be a conscious attempt to draw conclusions and form judgements and these will be adequately supported. Some understanding of differing and competing interpretations is to be expected and some evaluation of sources may be attempted but probably not in a very sophisticated form. Historical explanations and the use of historical concepts and vocabulary will be generally sound but some lack of understanding is to be expected. Use of English will be competent, clear and largely free of serious errors. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 4 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Band 4: 7–12 The answer may contain some analysis but descriptive or narrative material will predominate. The essay will show that the demands of the question have been understood, at least in good part, and that some attempt has been made to respond to them. It will be generally coherent with a fair sense of organisation. Focus on the exact terms of the question is likely to be uneven and there will be a measure of irrelevance. There will be some inaccuracies in knowledge, and the range may well be limited with some gaps. Understanding of the material will be generally sound, although there will be some lack of tautness and precision. Explanations will be generally clear although not always convincing or well developed. Some attempt at argument is to be expected but it will lack sufficient support in places and sense of direction may not always be clear. There may be some awareness of differing interpretations and some attempt at evaluating source material but this is not generally to be expected at this level and such skills, where deployed, will be unsophisticated. Some errors of English will be present but written style should be clear although lacking in real fluency. Band 5: 0–6 The answers will respond in some measure to the demands of the question but will be very limited in meeting these. Analysis, if it appears at all, will be brief and undeveloped. If an argument is attempted it will be lacking in real coherence, sense of direction, support and rigour. Focus on the exact terms of the question is likely to be very uneven; unsupported generalisations, vagueness and irrelevance are all likely to be on show. Historical knowledge, concepts and vocabulary will be insufficiently understood and there will be inaccuracies. Explanations may be attempted but will be halting and unclear. Where judgements are made they will be largely unsubstantiated whilst investigation of historical problems will be very elementary. Awareness of differing interpretations and the evaluation of sources is not to be expected. The answer may well be fragmentary, slight and even unfinished. Significant errors of spelling, grammar, punctuation and syntax may well hamper a proper understanding of the script. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 5 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 1: c. 1750–c. 1820 1 To what extent was Britain to blame for the deteriorating relationship with its American colonies between 1763 and 1776? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. The deterioration in relations hinged on issues such as taxation, commercial interests and politics. On taxation it could be argued Britain was to blame for introducing taxes that were unpopular, for example, the Sugar Tax of 1764, the Stamp Duty of 1765 and the Townsend Duties. However, in defence of Britain these taxes were appropriate as a way of paying for the wars against France, the defeat of whom benefitted the colonies. Further, the reaction of the colonies to the taxes was unnecessarily violent (activities of the Sons of Liberty and the Boston Tea Party) which of necessity obliged the British to enforce the law and in doing so inflame the situation further. It could be argued that the Proclamation Act, 1763, and the customs controls frustrated American ambitions. On the other hand, measures introduced by the British to control trade had been in place prior to 1763, with limited objection, in part because the colonists benefitted from the protection of the British navy. As with the American reaction to taxation it could be argued that the reaction of the latter was extreme, for example, the burning of the Gaspee. Britain could be blamed for failing to recognise the political aspirations of the Americans. The end of ‘salutory neglect’ and the introduction of troops and the associated heavy-handed use of power, for example, with the Boston Massacre and the punitive measures adopted against Massachusetts and Boston could be used to charge Britain with responsibility. However, the military acted with restraint (soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre were acquitted) and peace overtures to political activists – North’s Olive Branch Resolution – were rejected. Further, the creation of a militia (the Minute Men) stoked tension which led to the clash at Lexington, the event that sparked the start of the war. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Candidates may choose to identify issues as above and discuss the merits of each or present a case against the British and then counter it with an argument for American blame. The more astute will recognise the chain of action/reaction and the difficulty of assigning blame. Further, deterioration in relationships were uneven (they seemed less dangerous, 1770–1773, for example). Perceptive candidates will be aware that judgement depends, to some extent, on whether the matter is considered from either the British or American perspective. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be explicitly penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 6 2 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 How accurate is it to say that the American War of Independence was sustained largely because of the strength of American patriotism? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is clearly a need to define the key terms but the question is essentially asking whether the war was driven by ideas or more basic concerns, such as economic advantage or simple survival. It will be necessary to explore whether the rebels were motivated by a developing nationalism. This might be analysed through the statements of groups such as the Sons of Liberty or the more well known writings of Thomas Paine. Corresponding statements by the British crown, government or authorities would also be useful. Other factors such as the use of conscription by the rebels may open up other angles about the attitude of the soldiers. The use of the word ‘largely’ in the question will be seized upon by the stronger candidates in making final judgements. The essay should not be a discussion of the causes of the war, but some reference to that, if it is used to build a relevant argument about motivation, should be allowed. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as patriotism, popular sovereignty, and republicanism, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. For example, it may be argued that the war was not entirely about patriotism but that other ideas and issues were vital, such as economic motivations among the colonists and indeed the British. The stronger answers should establish that those involved had all manner of motives and some of whom, such as the conscripts on both sides, had no choice. Candidates who attempt to distinguish between the ‘myths’ of the Revolution and the realities should be rewarded. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 7 3 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Why did the first party system emerge? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: a synthesis of factors is needed but there must be some form of discrimination as to the relative weighting of the factors. The following issues will be relevant: the initial division between federalists and anti-federalists during the debates about the Constitution; the emergence of strong, charismatic personalities, such as Jefferson and Hamilton, with strong ideological differences; the build up of networks of support, including a partisan press, by these men; and finally differing foreign policy attitudes to the French Revolution and relations with Britain. Narratives should be avoided but a chronological approach which combines analysis is acceptable. The stronger answers will show that the emergence of the first party system involved a complex interplay of factors. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as the idea of states rights and its root in the fear of the emergence of a new absolutism. A confident handling of difficult terms such as Democratic-Republicanism will mark out stronger candidates. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critically evaluate source material and awareness of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. For example, it could be argued that the ambitions of the emerging party leaders were as important as the ideological issues. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 8 4 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 How is the outbreak of war between Britain and the United States in 1812 best explained? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there needs to be a synthesis of various factors. A long chronological narrative should be avoided but it is logical to approach the issues in chronological order. The question will require a multi-factoral approach in which issues such as tensions over trade during the Napoleonic wars, anger about the impressing of American citizens into the British navy, growing resentment in America about British interference in the Indian question and disputes about the border with Canada should feature. An exploration of the aims and attitudes of President Madison would also be pertinent and the British perspective should also be touched upon. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as commercial warfare and trade embargoes, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Several different interpretations are possible. It might be argued that the war did not have one particular spark but that should not lead to a simple listing of reasons for tension. The notion that it was an ‘unnecessary war’ implies either that there was not one single emotive issue, or that the war was sought deliberately, possibly by the President. The stronger answers will capture some of this uncertainty and complexity. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 9 5 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Why was there so little opposition to the continuation of the slave system in this period? AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there should be a multifactoral approach which focuses on Southern resistance to change and the weakness of the early abolitionist movement. The primary reason for the survival of the slave system, even in the wake of the Declaration of Independence which stated ‘all men are created equal’, is that the slave system was central to the cotton industry and that particular industry experienced a huge boom in the first half of the nineteenth century. The invention of the cotton gin was vital to this. Other explanatory factors include the entrenched nature of a racist outlook, not just in the South, and the class status anxiety felt by the southern white working class. The compromises arrived at in order to preserve the Union – such as the Missouri Compromise of 1820 – will need attention as will the underlying threat of secession. Stronger answers will create a synthesis of factors which goes beyond a mere list and discriminates about the relative weighting of the various points. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as slave or free labour, abolitionism and racism, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Several different interpretations are possible. The importance of slavery to the cotton industry is likely to feature as the key factor but arguments which seek to stress other points, such as for example the ingrained attitudes of the time, the parochial culture of the South or the counter-arguments of the South – and indeed the intended meaning of the initial Declaration of Independence – should be rewarded. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 10 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 2: c. 1820–1865 6 How influential was the movement to abolish slavery within the United States between 1820 and 1861? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: although a chronological approach may be appropriate, it is vital that an assessment of the level of influence is maintained. The development of abolitionism will probably involve a mention of the influence of the British abolitionist movement, the Liberian Project and the emergence the American Anti-Slavery Society led by William Garrison and Frederick Douglas. Other supportive groups such as the Quakers, the Temperance and Women’s rights groups might be touched upon to suggest growing influence, particularly from the 1840s and 1850s. Some of the obstacles to change will need attention, such as the importance of slavery to the southern economy and the political willingness of politicians to avoid confrontation, as seen in the Missouri Compromise. It may be that in the later phase after John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, there will be a need to look at how far abolitionism had brought the nation to the brink of Civil War. Stronger candidates will conclude with a clear focus on the precise issue of influence. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts – such as secession and the difference between abolitionism and the compromise positions – this will enable them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Clearly a number of interpretations are possible. Stronger answers will avoid a simple picture of growing influence culminating in war; it is clear that abolitionism was weak for long periods and that certain campaigns such as the Liberian project were not very successful. It might be argued that abolitionism, as such, did not cause the war. The better answers will explore the way the movement became entangled with other issues. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 11 7 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 To what extent did the presidency of Andrew Jackson change the nature of US politics? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the main focus should be on the extent to which Jackson used populist methods to strengthen the powers of the presidency and how far this re-shaped party alignments. Some discussion of his earlier life might be relevant in building a picture of a charismatic and possibly demagogic leader. Jackson’s political rhetoric and policies will need close attention. Specific political battles such as over tariffs or modernisation of the banks will help to build up a picture of the emergence of a ‘Whig’ opposition to Jackson. The president’s use of patronage and development of national power base may also form part of a wider discussion about the changing nature of American politics. Ultimately the stronger answers will conclude by focusing on the precise wording of the question. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as populism, democracy and the party system. Such understanding will enable students to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. For example, it might be argued that whilst Jackson’s presidency did alter the way American politics operated, some of the changes, such as the increased electorate across America, were not brought about by Jackson. Hence, conclusions may need to choose between an opportunist, or positively pro-active, depiction of the presidency. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 12 8 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Why did the relationship between Mexico, the Texan settlers and the US government lead to so much conflict between 1830 and 1848? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is a need to examine both the causes of the war between Mexico and Texas but also the subsequent war fought by the United States against Mexico. The first conflict will entail an examination of the changing situation in Texas in the 1830s, particularly the looking at the aims of the growing numbers of settlers and the attitude of the Mexican government. The events of 1836 need analysis. With regard to the later war, the role of President Polk needs close attention. The notion that war was deliberately provoked in order to gain California, and strength the position of Texas as a state of the Union, should be addressed. A simple narrative of the events is not enough: stronger answers will seek to arrive at a conclusion which encompasses the differing causes of the respective conflicts. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as Manifest Destiny, annexationism and possibly understand the difference between a state and federal patriotism. This will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Stronger answers will see that there were large economic forces at work as well as geopolitical strategies and the ambitions of individual leaders. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 13 9 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 With what justification can Abraham Lincoln’s election as US President be seen as the primary cause of the American Civil War? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it is not asking for a list of factors that led to the war; it is asking for an attempt weigh up Lincoln’s influence as against other factors that may have been the ‘primary cause’. Lincoln’s addresses in the debates with Douglas and the election campaign of 1860 will need close attention, including the extent of his efforts to avoid war. The other factors should include the actions of John Brown, the emergence and hardening of political divisions, the role of the press in building animosity to Lincoln, differing economic perspectives, and the divisive issues of slavery and secession and the impact of the 1860 election result. The stronger answers will set Lincoln’s role into this wider context and find a conclusion focusing on the precise wording of the question. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as wage-labour as against slave labour, emancipation, secession and, perhaps, the historical use of the term ‘catalyst’. This will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Clearly a number of interpretations are possible: it is likely that most students will steer way from the idea that a war with complex causal factors was prompted by the activities of one man, but this could be contested. Lincoln’s election in 1860, for example, might be seen as a plausible ‘primary’ cause. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 14 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 10 How important was the quality of generalship in explaining the victory of the Union army in the American Civil War? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it is vital that candidates build towards a concluding synthesis of the various factors which discriminates between the relative weighting of the given factor. Issues which will need attention would include most of the following: the quality of the military and political leadership, the respective economic resources, the role of railroads, the role of the navy as a source of supply, the relative sizes of the armies, the importance of the ideological issues and the significance of key battles such as Gettysburg. Long chronological narratives should be avoided but an analysis that follows a chronological structure is acceptable. The stronger answers will see that more than one perspective is possible but not shirk the need to find a best explanation. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as attrition, geopolitics and morale, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. The stronger answers will go beyond analyses of key generals or even particular battles and probe the structural imbalances, such as the respective abilities to supply or finance the armies. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 15 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 3: Themes c. 1750–c. 1900 11 ‘The settlement of the American West was mainly driven by a combination of land hunger among the poor and the greed of the railway companies.’ Discuss. Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: clearly the question requires a close analysis of the two factors mentioned but other factors should also be touched upon. Land hunger may need a brief definition and will probably entail some sort of comment on the plight of the poor in the eastern cities. The role of the railways is clearly very important but the use of the word ‘greed’ will prompt stronger candidates to analyse whether the railway pioneers were in some sense ‘robber barons’. Alternatively, the railways can be seen as responding to a pre-existing demand. There should be some attempt to see how government policies – such as the Homestead Act and the First Pacific Railroad Act – encouraged the two groups in the question to spread west. The role of influential presidents, such as Polk, should also be explored. Other factors might include gold and silver rushes, social problems in the cities and the desire to escape religious or racial persecution. The gradual defeat of Native American resistance might also be seen as a factor. The stronger answers will remain focused on the two key factors for the majority of the answer and not just provide a list of factors. Conclusions should pay close attention to the precise wording of the question. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as ‘manifest destiny’ and/or ‘rolling frontier’ and land hunger itself. This should enable them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Stronger answers will see the complex interplay of factors but will conclude with reference to the two selected factors. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 16 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 12 Why was the way of life of Native Americans so dramatically transformed during the nineteenth century? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: clearly a multi-factoral approach will be necessary but stronger answers will discriminate about the relative weighting of the factors. Official government policy will need close attention and certain key presidencies, such as that of Jackson, will require more attention than others. Other factors include the rush for land and minerals, the growth of the railways, the breakdown of agreements, the general culture clash between nomadic tribes and settling whites and the failure of Indian rebellions. Long chronological narratives should be avoided as there is almost too much detail: a thematic or factoral approach is best, although the analysis might well proceed in chronological order. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as culture and assimilation, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is debate to be had about how far the destruction of native American culture was deliberate or an unintended consequence of a modernising economy. The stronger answers will arrive at a complex synthesis of the various factors. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 17 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 13 How is the rapid industrialisation of the United States between 1865 and 1914 best explained? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the stronger answers will go beyond a mere listing of factors and look to place emphasis on some points above others. Factors should include most of the following: the victory of the industrial North in the Civil War, government policies such as protective tariffs, raw materials, markets, communication networks, such as the railroads and the existence of an entrepreneurial culture and corporate finance systems. Individual entrepreneurs, such as Carnegie or Morgan, might be examined but the stronger answers set their lives into a more structural analysis. A broad brush approach will be necessary, rather than a chronological narrative, given the lengthy time frame. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as entrepreneurialism, corporations, supply and demand. This will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is, for example, a significant debate about how far the Civil War promoted industrialisation. The stronger answers should arrive at a complex synthesis. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 18 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 14 To what extent and why did the role of women in American society change between 1850 and 1920? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there needs to be an evaluation of the extent of change, rather than list of areas in which change was occurring. Given the length of the time frame and the broad nature of the question, chronological narratives should be avoided. Statistics may be useful in supporting the view that the majority of women were restricted to the domestic sphere and that change was not that great. For example, in 1870 only 13% of women worked outside the home and by 1920 the figure was not dramatically higher. However, it should be explained that women’s experience varied according to class and race. The rise of industrialisation in this period saw many women relinquish domestic service for factory work. Towards the end of the century women also began to find employment in clerical work. In addition to this there were women who forged political careers, such as Elizabeth Stanton in the suffrage movement. The success of this movement would seem to suggest that attitudes were changing quite quickly in the later part of the period. More social issues, such as access to contraception, might be thought as important as enfranchisement. Conclusions in the stronger answers will seek to judge whether the changes in this period should be seen as considerable, modest or negligible. It may be that the judgement could be quite complex, allowing for different assessments according to class, ethnicity and location within America. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as patriarchy, rights and the relationships between class, race and gender, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Although the majority of women did not experience dramatic change, there is room for arguments which stress that this situation was changing quite rapidly and that a minority of women, particularly in the middle class, found new roles for themselves. However, candidates who wish to stress the persistence of what might be termed traditional values may well achieve high marks, if they have shown awareness of some areas of change as well. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 19 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 15 How much light do American novels of the nineteenth century shed on social change within the United States? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it will be important that answers explore not only the way that novels can illuminate social changes but also the extent to which they tend to deal with limited and rather particular social realms. Given that the question is asking about American novels broadly, it will be expected that the better answers will refer to more than one novel, although it may be that one author receives the majority of attention. The range of authors that might be referred to is of course large, but the most likely would be Mark Twain, Henry James, James Fenimore Cooper, Nathaniel Hawthorne and Edith Wharton. Such authors shed light on many changing aspects of American life, from the culture of the South to the rolling frontier, women’s changing role and America’s relationship with Europe, particularly in terms of class. The stronger answers may see both the strengths and weaknesses of the novel as a source for historians dealing with social change. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as the utility of fiction as a historical source and the deeper questions around the idea of truth. This will enable candidates to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. This area of History is open to all manner of interpretations but the more able candidates will range widely and see some of the difficulties in using the novel to supply information about the American experience. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 20 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 16 How is the rapid spread of the railway network across the United States in the nineteenth century best explained? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the stronger answers will go beyond a mere listing of factors and look to place emphasis on some points above others. Factors should include most of the following: the rise in population (linked to immigration) and the growth of towns and cities which needed to be served and supplied, and so acted as a spur to the railways; innovations in transportation, the advantages of railways (they were generally faster, cheaper and more reliable) over other forms of transport such as the stagecoach and the steamboat, the demand for expansion in connexion with the transportation of industrial goods, westward expansion and the opportunities it afforded, the desire for improved links and communication between East and West and the direct stimulus of competition to develop routes e.g. the transcontinental line. Also, the impact of the Civil War and growth of US industry could be looked at. There are legislative acts to consider (i.e. generous grants of land, huge loans), and connexions to all manner of other issues, such as the clash with Native Americans and the opening up of opportunities for immigrants and various kinds of pioneer or entrepreneur (Vanderbilt, Harriman). The stronger answers will be characterised by analyses of the various factors provided. A broad brush approach will be necessary, rather than a chronological narrative, given the lengthy time frame. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as the historical use of the term ‘catalyst’ and, possibly, technological determinism. Other notions such as economic modernisation or industrialisation may also be relevant. It is vital that candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. As this is a thematic question it is possible that candidates will arrive at different judgement but the stronger answers will range widely, support arguments with detail and arrive at conclusion that relates sharply to the precise question. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 21 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 4: 1865–1914 17 ‘For African Americans, the era of Redemption was little better than a tyranny’. Discuss. Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: most importantly the question is asking whether the creation of the Jim Crow system was equivalent to a new form of tyranny. Candidates may well feel that the question is asking for some sort of comparison between the slave system and Jim Crow in terms of degrees of oppression. Chronological narratives are not appropriate but the analysis can be structured along chronological lines. Content is likely to focus first on the advances made in the era of Reconstruction, such as the amendments to the constitution, the work of the Freedman’s bureau and the subsequent progress made. However, the backlash in the era of Redemption is more important, particularly the rise of Jim Crow laws and the eventual emergence of the ‘separate but equal’ doctrine. The harshness of that period, given the prevalence of lynching, will make it possible to see a new tyranny emerging but candidates should also see that there was still opportunity for escape in that era, such as in the Great Migration. The stronger answers will allow for the complex and contradictory nature of the historical situation by the turn of the century. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as tyranny, oppression, ‘Jim Crow’ and segregation. It may be that the difference between de jure and de facto segregation is useful. The idea of Revolution and Counter Revolution may also help the analysis of Reconstruction and Redemption. It is vital that candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Stronger answers will explore the concept of tyranny and the implied suggestion that Jim Crow America left African Americans in a situation almost as bad as the slave era. The oppressive nature of the Jim Crow South and socio-economic precariousness of the post-emancipation experience will be demonstrated by stronger candidates, but some awareness of positive developments should be looked at, even if final conclusions are fairly negative. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 22 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 18 How influential were socialist ideas within the United States between 1880 and 1920? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it may be necessary to define socialist ideas but it is also important to realise that socialism had several aspects to it but, above all, it is vital to assess the level of its influence. Candidates will want to explore socialism as part of the Trade Union movement’s ideology but there is also a need to look at the emergence of the Socialist Party of America under Eugene Debs and also at the International Workers of the World. Stronger candidates will also see the influence of socialist ideas within the Progressive and Populist movements. The context in which socialist groups operated will also require attention: U.S. entry into World War One, for example, created a crisis for American Socialism, with many socialists, such as Debs, going to prison. The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia also helped to promote a crackdown on socialists in the post-war Red Scare. Content may be structured in a chronological fashion but analysis should keep the demands of the question under review throughout. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as the distinction between types of socialism, ranging from revolutionary Marxism, the anarchosyndicalism of the IWW, moderate Trade Unionism and liberal Progressivism. It is vital that candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is a lot that might be said about socialist ideas within America, but it is also the case that the Socialist party and even Trade Unionism were relatively small organisations, in terms of numbers. Certainly, by 1920, American Socialism looks quite weak but it might be contended that socialist ideas were nevertheless still highly influential. The very fact of a Red Scare suggests significant influence. Stronger answers will show awareness that different interpretations are possible. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 23 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 19 Account for the political influence of William Jennings Bryan. Candidates should: AO1 – Bryan had influence in the politics of the US in the twenty years prior to the outbreak of World War One. Candidates should acknowledge his importance in the Populist and Progressive Movements and the anti-imperialism of the period. However, the emphasis should be on explaining the reasons for the influence he exerted in these areas. He was an effective orator with a zeal and idealism that proved persuasive. His ‘Cross of Gold’ speech at the Convention of the Democratic Party in 1896 was a sensation. However, candidates may argue that his demagogic style also alienated many, including traditional farmers and he was denounced in conservative quarters, including the main newspapers. He was also an indefatigable campaigner: as a presidential candidate in 1896 he travelled 18,000 miles and secured 6.5 million votes against McKinley who won by a narrow margin. Bryan prevailed in the South and West but he failed to convince industrial workers in the eastern States. His ability to tap into contemporary concerns about current issues also accounts for his influence. He recognised the power of the Populist Movement and offered economic policies, notably the rejection of the Gold Standard that chimed with the demands of distressed farmers. Bryan helped form the Anti-Imperialist League of 1898 in opposition to the war in Cuba which channelled the considerable anxiety about US foreign policy. In 1912 his decision to support Wilson as the presidential candidate of the Democratic Party was crucial, a move explained by his recognition of the widespread support for the Progressive agenda that Wilson represented. Candidates may criticise him as an opportunist and there is little doubt that his political influence would probably not have outlasted the election campaign of 1896 if he had not adapted his policies and strategies. To some extent circumstances help explain his influence. However, even candidates critical of his manoeuvrings might recognise some consistency of principle in his championship of the citizen and the ideals of the US Constitution against the ambition of ‘big business’. In addition, the weakness of the Republicans – their caution in 1896, the split between radicals and conservatives thereafter – allowed Bryan political influence. On the other hand, fear of Bryan galvanised the wealthy who were encouraged to increase their funding of the Republican Party. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. A descriptive narrative may be adopted but is likely to be less effective than one that analyses different factors. Either way, in the process candidates should be able to prioritise factors. Better answers will attempt to weigh the influence of Bryan to the extent that some may suggest his influence was largely illusory or, at best, spasmodic. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 24 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 20 How far is it accurate to describe American foreign policy between 1880 and 1914 as essentially imperialist? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it will be necessary to show awareness of the fact that imperialism is a term which may be defined in differing ways. Much will depend upon this point. If imperialism is defined narrowly, as a deliberate quest to construct a formal empire of directly ruled colonies, then content will be reduced to examples such as the acquisition of Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam, after the Spanish-American War. However, if imperialism is defined more broadly, it could encompass the drive for markets and raw materials, for example with regard to the open door policy in China. Imperialist ideology should also be explored, looking at the ‘civilising mission’, racial thinking and belief in naval power. A narrative of events should be avoided but the analysis may be set out in a chronological fashion. Given that the question extends to 1914, stronger candidates will look at the nature of Wilson’s foreign policy, as possibly something of a break from imperialism. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as imperialism, informal empire, social darwinism and racism. It is vital that candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. At the heart of the question is the meaning of the term imperialist. Stronger candidates will get to grips with this concept and should also explore the question of whether Wilson was anti-imperial. Clearly, several interpretations are possible; stronger candidates will capture that complexity. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 25 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 21 How successful was Woodrow Wilson’s first term as President? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. Candidates are likely to base their response on an analysis of Wilson’s programme called ‘The New Freedom’. Its attack on Trusts in the Clayton Act provided for more competition but its effects depended on its interpretation by the judges who were reluctant to use it against the rich. On the other hand, the investigation of fair trade was more successful. The Underwood Tariff of 1913 reduced the general level of import tax and so made the importation of goods cheaper. However, the shortfall in revenue was met with increased taxation of the rich. The new federal banking system he created seemed successful in creating stability in banking which was essential to the development of the economy. Other measures to improve conditions in the merchant marine, in building roads, establishing the 8 hour day, and providing compensation for injury at work were largely successful. His record abroad was less successful. Events in Mexico led to American military involvement in the country and although peace with Mexico was achieved, Pancho Villa was not captured and peace was at a human cost. His attempts to mediate between the warring nations in Europe failed and his reluctance to intervene on the side of the Allies was not popular especially in the wake of the sinking of the Lusitania and British policy of blockading Europe and the black listing of some American firms was irritating. On the other hand, his policy of nonintervention benefitted American business and trade with Britain in war materials was highly profitable. Most Americans did not want to engage in affairs they regarded as not their own and in that sense Wilson’s policy was successful. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Better answers are likely to establish what Wilson’s objectives were against which his actions might be judged. Reference to his inaugural speech of 1913 would be a very good way of doing this. Some may distinguish between his domestic record and his foreign policy but better answers will recognise that whatever his successes there were shortcomings in his policies at home and abroad. Reference to his second term would not be inappropriate if this was done to highlight the key elements of his policies in his first term by way of contrast. AO3 – [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be explicitly penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 26 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 5: 1914–1953 22 ‘The weakness of the US economy in the 1920s outweighed its strength.’ Discuss. Candidates should: AO1 – The fact that the Great Depression began with the Wall Street Crash in late 1929 and lasted for at least 4 years, arguably throughout the 1930s, might encourage most candidates to argue that the weaknesses in the US economy did, indeed, outweigh its strengths. More perceptive analyses will argue that despite its weaknesses the strengths of the US economy were greater and problems experienced in the following decade were to do with factors other than weaknesses in the US economy. Protectionism may be considered as a weakness in so far as tariffs were reciprocated with damaging effects on US exports. However, they helped secure the domestic market against foreign competition. This discussion might be widened to consider the role of government as a whole. Was the laissez-faire economics of the 1920s a weakness or strength? Overproduction of goods might be assessed as a weakness given the limitations to demand but the efficiency of industry and the beneficial effect of higher wages for industrial workers in stimulating demand will need to be weighed. This might link to the issue of the distortions in the internal market with the imbalance between those with disposable income and those without (poor farmers and Blacks). Some will regard the ease with which credit could be obtained, the associated speculation on the Stock Market and the lack of regulation of the banking system as financial weaknesses that fed directly into the collapse of 1929. It could be argued that markets are self regulating and the prosperity of the 1920s is an indication of the strength of the financial sector. The problems of agriculture, especially the overproduction of food which impoverished many farmers, was clearly a weakness in the economy. However, more people lived in towns, agriculture was susceptible to downturns as in the 1880s and 1890s and farmers were supported, to some extent, by the governments of the 1920s with financial schemes and the encouragement given to co-operatives. Candidates who argue that the strengths of the US economy outweigh its weaknesses may argue that international problems, such as the inhibiting effects of reparations in Europe and political instability in different parts of the world, were more important. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Some candidates will choose to deal with the weakness of the US economy and then consider its strengths, leading to a judgement. An examination of a range of factors in turn looking at the weaknesses and strengths of each is more likely to generate discussion and a more sustained analysis. A final judgement should be attempted even if it is ambivalent. Reference to the Wall Street Crash and subsequent developments could be made relevant. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 27 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 23 How accurate is the view that in the period 1920 to 1941 the United States followed a policy of isolationism? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is be a need to clarify what is meant by isolationism. A narrative approach should be avoided but a chronological approach could work as long as the issue is kept under analysis. Content should focus upon the shift away from Wilson’s interventionism to Harding’s alternative approach. The refusal to join the League should also be examined. In addition to this, it might be that isolationism is also relevant to other policies such as the restrictions on immigration and the placing of tariffs on foreign goods. The neutrality acts of the 1930s might also be seen as part of an isolationist approach. Franklin Roosevelt’s presidency will need close analysis. Stronger answers will look at countervailing trends such as America’s engagement with international diplomacy through such agreements as the Washington Conference or the Briand – Kellogg pact. Roosevelt’s approach also saw a gradual shift away from isolationism, although the nature of this shift is open to debate. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical and economic concepts, such as isolationism, interventionism and armed neutrality. It is vital that candidates present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arrive at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Interpretations will be determined to some extent by the understanding of the term isolationism. Stronger answers will define it more broadly, seeing economic and cultural aspects to it. There is also a significant debate to be had about the intentions of Franklin Roosevelt: whether he was always a frustrated interventionist or was pushed into war by Japanese actions. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 28 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 24 How justified was the opposition to the New Deal? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. Opposition was widespread. Those on the right accused FDR of socialism and those on the left of failing to do enough. On the right the Republican Party and various State legislatures, big business and groups like the Liberty League rejected the intervention of government in economic and social affairs and the apparent threat to individual freedom which they believed the New Deal represented. Examples of policies that epitomised such fears need to be explored, for instance, the Social Security Act, the Public Utility Holding Company Act, the National Recovery Administration and increases in tax. Such policies may have challenged the principles of those on the right but most were compromises. Furthermore, many measures were welcomed by the right, for example, the legislation which modernised the banking system and individual entrepreneurs backed the New Deal. The judgements of the Supreme Court in challenging the constitutionalism of various aspects of the New Deal could be explored. Did their verdicts confirm the charge of FDR’s opponents that he was exceeding his powers? His attack on the Supreme Court evoked widespread criticism. The opposition of those on the left, such as socialists and communists and various welfare pressure groups, for example, the ‘Share Our Wealth’ campaign, could be assessed by examining some of the alphabet laws, for example, the CCC, FERA, CWA, PWA, and their impact on employment and social welfare. Did the AAA go far enough to help farmers and did the economic gains of the TVA compromise the environment? Further, trades unions were largely supportive of the New Deal and the electorate voted for FDR in 1936 in overwhelming numbers. The state of the economy on the eve of WW2 might be considered to assess whether the opposition of the left was justified. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, enabling them to present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Candidates may opt to assess a range of policies discretely but given the scale of the New Deal analysis is likely to be more effective if the emphasis is on the nature of the opposition and the selective examination of aspects of the New Deal to judge whether opposition was justified. Nonetheless, either approach would be valid. AO3 – [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be explicitly penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 29 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 25 How significant was the role of the United States in the defeat of Germany in the Second World War? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required. The factual content should include the following main topics: the role of the US in the D-Day operations (some candidates might argue that the landings were rather later than they might have been – 1943 may have been possible, so did the US delay the defeat of Germany?) and subsequent ‘drive on Berlin’ – the US strategy of a ‘broad front’ rather than ‘a dash’ for Berlin could be discussed, and perhaps linked to the Soviet Union in that they reached Berlin ahead of the Americans and so brought the war to an end sooner; US actions in Africa and then Southern Italy, the role of the US in other aspects of the war such as in terms of naval and aerial conflict; the nature of US military technology, supplies, propaganda and ideology. Key figures such as Eisenhower or Patton may also need attention. Inevitably, other factors will need to be looked at. The role of the Soviet Union in the defeat of Germany should certainly receive attention; its contribution was to divide German forces and occupy the bulk of their army, so reducing resistance to the Americans in the West. It might also be argued that the internal weaknesses of Nazi Germany – for example the excessive reliance on the Fuhrer – contributed significantly. Also, the role of Britain could be considered as a factor in so far as Britain stood alone until 1941(really 1942) in Europe, that it was British forces that inflicted a major blow at El Alamein in 1942 and that without Britain the Americans would not have been able to enter the war in Europe at all, certainly not from Britain to launch the D Day landings for example. The US Lend-Lease deal with Britain, without which Britain would have struggled to stay in the war in the first two years could also be considered, along with US bombing raids over Germany (again only possible with Britain as a base). Conclusions should relate sharply to the precise words of the question. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as attrition, propaganda, alliances and unconditional surrender. The way that Roosevelt and Churchill shaped the ideological purpose of the war might draw candidates into exploring notions of freedom as against totalitarianism. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. For example, it might well be argued that the US shared with the Soviet Union the main responsibility for the defeat of Nazi Germany. Other perspectives are possible and the stronger answers will explore some of these, thereby demonstrating the complex nature of this period of military history. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 30 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 26 How can the ‘Red Scare’ of the late 1940s and early 1950s be best explained? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the central issue here is whether the McCarthyite era can be explained simply as an attempt to discover and defeat Communists at home or whether it was driven by other factors. However, there are ambiguities in the question which might allow candidates legitimately to open other angles, such as in exploring how the motive forces behind Cold War foreign policy differed from those forces behind the antiCommunist crusade at home. For example, it might be argued that anti-Communism at home was not about containment but complete destruction. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. In analysing what created the Red Scare it will be necessary at least to look at the way the Cold War abroad affected internal American politics. The ‘loss’ of China in 1949 and the beginning of the Korean War are important in creating climate of panic within America. However, it is also true that American politicians sought to exploit the mood in order to advance their own or their party’s fortunes. Truman for example instituted a loyalty test before McCarthy became prominent. McCarthy’s motives and methods will need examination. In addition to that, the activities of the FBI are also important in generating fear of an internal red threat. The role of the press is also important. Stronger answers will develop a synthesis will conclude with reference to the precise wording of the question. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as the Red Scare, political paranoia and possibly the use of the term ‘witch-hunt’. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Interpretations may vary in terms of emphasis but the stronger answers will focus on the interplay between foreign and domestic issues and on the role of personal ambition. Nixon and McCarthy are most relevant here. The extent to which there was some genuine cause for concern about left-wing subversion of America is also a most debateable area; the case of Alger Hiss, for example, still provokes controversy. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 31 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 6: 1953–2000 27 To what extent, if at all, should Eisenhower be regarded as a successful president? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: this appears to be a fairly straightforward question but the stronger candidates will give some thought to the meaning of the term ‘successful’. A chronological approach is acceptable but simple narrative should be avoided. The content is likely to include discussion of Eisenhower’s foreign policy: the situation at the end of the Korean War, involvement in Iran, the ‘new look’ policies, the Hungarian Uprising, tensions between NATO and the Warsaw Pact and Eisenhower’s response to the Cuban revolution. Other issues might be included, possibly, even the beginnings of the space race and the arms race and summit diplomacy. The domestic policies should include Eisenhower’s response to the McCarthyite witch-hunt, his handling of the Little Rock Crisis, his relationship with Congress and his role in prompting the economic boom of the 1950s. Stronger answers will also look at the fostering of his folksy image and perhaps even see this as helping to develop a perception of a successful president. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as ‘containment’, the Eisenhower doctrine, McCarthyism, paranoia and possibly charisma. In foreign policy terms, the definition of containment will allow a judgement to be made about the level of success. ‘Roll-Back’ might be referred to and the idea of ‘spheres of influence’ could be useful. In domestic policy, the electoral fortunes of the Republicans might be seen as an index of his success. Candidates must present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It might well be argued that Eisenhower’s likeable image masked some serious failings, such as inaction over Hungary, mishandling of Cuba and possibly even lack of initiative with regard to the Civil Rights movement. Alternatively, it could be argued that in most areas – in his relationship with Congress for example – he was more successful than unsuccessful. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 32 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 28 How much credit does Johnson deserve for the Civil Rights legislation passed during his presidency? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: establishing the nature of Kennedy’s agenda is vital but an informed knowledge of Johnson’s ‘Great Society’ legislation is also required. Kennedy in his ‘new frontier’ speech arguably sketched out aims to bring in reforms in areas relating to education, Civil Rights and poverty. However, it should be pointed out that his rhetoric was not very specific. Johnson did implement reforms in these areas but he also went further and that will need attention. Johnson’s domestic achievements were extensive, particularly two major Civil Rights Acts (1964, 1968), and the Voting Rights Act (1965). Also of note are the following: the Economic Opportunity Act, Medicare and Medicaid, Education acts, and environmental reforms. Johnson’s personal contribution to the passage of these acts should be looked at. His persuasion of Congress, his negotiations with Civil Rights leaders and the speed with which he moved suggest that he deserved much credit. Further, if much of what was introduced in his Acts was based on what JFK planned the fact is that Johnson chaired the PCEEO (President’s Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity) that had devised much of what JFK approved. It could be argued that measures to help the poor in general, i.e. the Economic Opportunity Act, Medicare and Medicaid mentioned above, also helped blacks a lot. However, the Congress of 1964 was dominated by liberal Democrats so he had support on the Hill (he still had to marshall it), the civil rights leaders deserve credit, the JFK legacy of sympathy after his death was important. The media were also instrumental in forcing Johnson’s hand eg. the coverage of the Selma to Montgomery March forced Johnson to federalise the National Guard in Alabama. On the debit side, perhaps he could have done more? He was offended by the riots of 1965 and 1967 (yet 2 of the 3 Acts mentioned above followed these events), Vietnam became a serious distraction, he declined Martin Luther King’s pleas for a Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged and as a result their relationship floundered. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. Stronger answers will explore whether Johnson went beyond Kennedy’s agenda and may well compare their political methods and the political contexts within which they operated. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as the meaning of the ‘New Frontier’ and the ‘Great Society’. Notions of a legacy and the impact of an apparent political martyrdom might also be relevant. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Exploring the mythology of Kennedy might allow candidates to revise stereotypical notions and argue for Johnson as a more effective president and his reforms as being far more extensive than those Kennedy attempted or aimed to achieve in the longer term. Stronger answers will conclude with close reference to the precise wording of the question. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 33 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 29 ‘Of all the presidents dealing with the Vietnam conflict, President Johnson deserves the most criticism for the eventual failure.’ Discuss. Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: a chronological analysis of president after president is legitimate, but Johnson will need a lengthier treatment than the others. Candidates should avoid treating this simply as an essay asking for a broad analysis of why America failed which might reduce Johnson to a small factor. Eisenhower and Kennedy should be examined in terms of initial US involvement and early escalation. Johnson’s decision to escalate on a much greater scale needs evaluation as will the reasons for the relative failure of this course. Domestic reactions to the Vietnam War, and Johnson’s response to that, will need examination. Nixon will also need close attention as he, arguably, tried and failed to extract America without the sense of failure and with honour. Although there are numerous factors which led to the lack of success, the essay is primarily about presidential policies and the stronger answers will keep that as the predominant focus. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as guerrilla warfare, ‘hearts and minds’ and the ‘counter culture’. The concept of ‘mission creep’ may be useful. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a wellconsidered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Interpretations may vary but many will argue that Johnson and Nixon lost the war on the home front with events like the shooting of protestors at Kent State University. Johnson’s inability to persuade the American people of the rightness of his course led to his unpopularity and decision not to run in 1968. It might well be argued that Johnson was unfortunate and even tragic, in as much as his preferred focus was meant to be on creating the Great Society at home. Stronger answers will demonstrate the complexity of the problems faced by the various presidents and explore their skill in dealing with the whole situation. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 34 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 30 To what extent did the reputation of the presidency diminish during the 1970s? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: there is clearly a need to assess the gravity and cumulative effect of a number of crises. The flowing content is relevant: Johnson’s unpopularity in 1968, Nixon’s controversial bombing of Cambodia and Laos, the Watergate scandal, Ford’s relative weakness and the pardon for Nixon, the foreign policy calamities of Carter, such as the Tehran hostage crisis and the perceived weak response to the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. The effects of the Watergate scandal is at the heart of this question but students may prefer to stress other elements, and underlying economic problems after the oil crisis might also be used profitably. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as ‘Machiavellian’, the imperial and imperilled presidency, corruption and stagflation. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It might well be argued that the various presidents faced an unusually complex conjunction of problems in the 1970s from a war that had become unwinnable to a new set of problems in the near east. Nixon’s corruption probably did most to damage the reputation of the office but Nixon also achieved quite a lot, such as in his détente initiatives. Furthermore, it might be argued that Carter was unfortunate in certain respects and did not damage the reputation of the office. The propaganda of the Reagan campaign, which sought to depict America as enfeebled under Carter, might also be used. Stronger candidates will see that much depends on public and global perceptions. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 35 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 31 What, if anything, were the achievements of the policy of détente in the 1960s and 1970s? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: although there are specific agreements and diplomatic accords that need attention, there is a need to assess whether this ultimately failed and led to a tougher policy under Reagan. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided but analysis may well proceed in chronological order. Content should focus on Nixon’s initiatives with regard to negotiating the SALT treaty and opening relations with China. Other elements such as the symbolic link-up in space might be seen as part of a wider cultural thaw. However, it might legitimately be argued that détente had earlier roots in summit diplomacy and in the improving of communications between the Soviet Union and America after the Cuban missile crisis. The eventual failure of détente in 1979 with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan will need assessment, as will Reagan’s change of tack. Stronger candidates will be able to set the policy into a context which explores what went before and came after. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as détente itself, the thaw and, possibly, Kissinger’s notion of realpolitik. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Although there may be a tendency simply to list what happened during the détente era, stronger answers will see the wider context and may even see that in the more hard-line Reagan era, elements of the earlier approach survived, such as in the START agreements. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 36 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 32 ‘Both in domestic and foreign policy, Clinton’s presidency marked a decisive shift away from the Republican ideology of the 1980s.’ Discuus. Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: Republican ideology will need to be accurately defined. At the least there is a need to identify the economic approach with its belief in low taxes, small government and cuts in welfare in order to break the dependency culture. Clinton’s battles with Congress over the federal deficit will need attention as will his North American Free Trade Agreement. In foreign policy terms the task is a little more complicated as the collapse of the Soviet Union by 1991 meant that Clinton faced different problems than those of the 1980s. However, both Reagan and Bush senior followed a fairly tough foreign policy and Clinton’s foreign policy interventions, such as in Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo, will need to be compared in general approach. Stronger candidates will focus on the specific question, which asks for a comparative approach, rather than simply an assessment of Clinton. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as Republican ‘neo-liberalism’ and on Clinton’s side the idea of liberal interventionism and the Third Way. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Arguably, Clinton did represent something of a shift, particularly in his attitude to public finances. However, his foreign policy was arguably hesitant and perhaps not based on coherent principles. His problems with Congress and the Lewinsky affair will have to be woven into the wider ideological discussion. Clinton’s reputation may suggest a politician driven by opportunism rather than of ideas and stronger candidates will explore this area of debate. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 37 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 Section 7: Themes c. 1900–2000 33 ‘The history of the United States saw a period of prolonged growth, culminating in a profound economic crisis.’ Assess this view of the US between 1941 and 1980. Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: the question is probably best dealt with in two parts, looking at the reasons for the boom and the reasons for the crisis of the later 1970s. Simple chronological narratives should be avoided as this question requires structural economic assessments. The impact of the Second World War on the American economy will need attention. In addition, the post-war population boom, new consumer markets, relatively cheap raw materials – such as oil – will also need attention. Government polices in the post-war period, such as low tax thresholds, support for consumer credit mechanisms and limited intervention against large corporations, should be assessed in terms of the relative weight of that factor. The lack of global competition in the post-war environment is also important, although the impact of the Marshall Plan should be touched upon. The crisis of the 1970s will need to be explored and fundamental to that are the oil price rises beginning in the 1970s. Other reasons for low growth and inflation will need to be explored. Stronger students will offer an overall conclusion. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical and economic concepts, such as consumerism and stagflation. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is debate to be had about the importance of government policies in bringing about both the boom and the later problems. It might be argued, for example, that in both cases external factors created the conditions that determined the economic outcomes. World War Two for example was a profound catalyst for American expansion after 1945. Stronger candidates will keep the complexity of this large question under control. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 38 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 34 How accurate is the view that the presidential office increased its power dramatically in the period 1933 to 1969? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: at the heart of the question is the notion of an expanding executive authority which considerably shifted the balance of the constitution. The question is not asking whether this was a good or bad development but whether it can be said to have happened. Content would probably focus first on Roosevelt’s extensions of presidential authority in his battles with Congress and the Supreme Court in order to push through the New Deal legislation. After that the context of the War and the Cold War seemed to facilitate great presidential power. Truman’s decision to go to war in Korea without seeking a Congressional declaration of war is important. Johnson’s actions in Vietnam might also seem to show great presidential power. Stronger answers will discriminate between presidents whilst still seeing overall patterns. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as the imperial presidency, checks and balances within the constitution, and ‘over-mighty’ executive power. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is an existing debate about the ‘imperial presidency’ and that might be mentioned but it should still be possible to handle the debate very well without actually using the term. Stronger answers will explore the various presidencies and perhaps focus on key words in the question. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 39 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 35 How convincing is the argument that after World War Two a distinctively US style of art and architecture emerged? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: essentially candidates must assess the hypothesis that the Nazi invasion of France, and specifically the occupation of Paris, prompted a flight from Europe of the major artists and collectors and that after 1945 the epicentre of the modern art business became America, or more specifically New York. Evidence might be that the major post-war art movements of abstract expressionism and Pop Art seemed to be centred in New York. Indeed post-war pop culture in general was distinctly American. Art dealers and collectors such as Peggy Guggenheim seem to embody the wider notion of a flight from Paris back to New York. In the 1920s and 1930s Paris had undoubtedly exerted a great pull upon American writers and artists but after the war the pull was possibly in the opposite direction. In the 1950s, in the person of Jackson Pollock, the United States discovered its first major indigenous modern artist. Many artists of European descent such as de Kooning and Rothko had relocated to the US and remained there for their working lives. Architectural styles as well as architects are difficult to pigeon-hole by nationality. Cross fertilisation and the commissioning of architects world-wide in the 20th century means a case can be made that there is no distinctly US style of architecture any more than there is in any other country. Rather, there are architectural styles that are universal, notably Modernism and Postmodernism. The former – characterised by simplified form, flat sides, horizontal and vertical lines, glass and iron etc – and the latter which blended some aesthetic elements of the pre modern era were the styles in Europe and Australia as well as America. So, La Defense in Paris can be equated with the likes of the Seagram Building in New York City (1958). Sky-scrappers may have been first built in America but they were a style of building adopted elsewhere. That being said, some architects claimed to be representative of a distinctly American style of architecture. Frank Lloyd Wright (d 1959) was one and his influence on subsequent generations of American architects, such as Louis Kahn (d 1974), Buckminster Fuller (d 1983) or Charles and Ray Eames, was immense and ensured a thread of continuity of style in the US. This could be characterised by the emphasis on spaces – open plans and the blurring of indoor and outdoor spaces – for example, The Case Study Houses (1945–66) in and around Los Angeles. Some argue that Postmodernist architecture started in America (influence of Robert Venturi might be stressed: museums in Seattle in 1985 and San Diego 1996), but if originally distinctive, it too became a universal style. Stronger candidates will explore this broad question and arrive at a synthesis. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts such as Modern Art itself, avant garde, abstract expressionism and popular culture. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It might be objected that something as complex as ‘Modern art’ would not have one particular home. The rise of French New Wave cinema, for example, might be used to undermine arguments for American predominance. It might also be argued that the rise of New York as the centre of Modern Art marketing and production is not quite the same thing as the idea of the United States as a whole becoming the home of modern Art. It could be pointed out that during the McCarthy era much of America was very hostile to all avant garde art, much of which was seen as un-American. There is, however, an argument which states that the abstract expressionism of painters like Pollock was seized upon by some as exemplifying a uniquely American, individualist ethos. Stronger candidates will explore these contradictions. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 40 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. 36 How persuasive is the view that between the 1960s and the 1980s there was a cultural civil war unfolding within the United States? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: although there is a need to look at a number of social events and movements, candidates must not lose sight of the precise wording of the question which asks how ‘persuasive’ the idea is. Stronger conclusions will allude to specific wording of the question. Content will focus on the component parts of the so-called Counter-Culture and the emergence of a conservative backlash in the seventies culminating in Reaganism. Within the Counter-Culture were several overlapping and/or colliding submovements, such as the anti-war movement, the ‘New Left’, the hippies, Civil Rights and Black Power, feminism and gay rights. The backlash would include Nixon’s appeal to the ‘silent majority’ and his electoral successes. Reagan’s emergence should be charted, particularly his exploitation of conservative America’s distrust of unpatriotic sentiment and hostility to perceived welfare scrounging by counter-cultural elements. The rise of a Christian Right should be touched upon. The cultural civil war might be seen as becoming particularly intense when it comes to certain issues such as the conflict between the police and the Black Power movement, or clashes with the homosexual community and or protests outside and attacks upon abortion clinics. Stronger answers will, in the final analysis, explore whether the concept of a ‘civil war’ is helpful. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as Counter-Culture, Reaganism and the New Right and the notion of a civil war itself. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. Students should perhaps be aware of the various forms of bias that colour much of the writing around this subject. Stronger answers will avoid the temptation to pass judgement on the various struggles but focus instead on how useful the concept of a civil war is. It might be contended for example that American social history in this era is not a two sided struggle: the so-called Counter-Culture was not a coherent movement, eventually fracturing into myriad special interest groups and that the majority of Americans were not taking sides as such. In that sense the term ‘civil war’ might be seen as an exaggeration and a simplification. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 41 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 37 Assess the claim that between 1945 and 2000 the United States resolved its racial tensions and became an integrated society. Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: it may well be that most candidates will stress the Civil Rights movement but the question is broader than that and some reference must be made to the problems posed by immigration and possibly also the position of Native Americans. Content which focuses on the position of African Americans will need to look at the main developments in the struggle for Civil Rights, such as Brown versus the Board of Education, the Little Rock crisis, Kennedy’s intervention and Johnson’s Civil and Voting Rights Acts. Beyond that there is the volatile era of Black Power and, in the later phase, a much stronger sense of integration with African Americans reaching positions of authority and individuals such as Jesse Jackson becoming high profile politicians. Native American legal and political struggles will need attention as will the continuing anxiety about illegal immigrants. Stronger candidates will arrive at a conclusion which relates sharply to the precise question and conveys the complexity of the history. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as integration, assimilation, Americanisation, identity and self determination. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at, a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. There is case for arguing that African Americans and Native Americans have made progress since the Second World War but some might argue that this has been at the cost of a sense of solidarity. There is a debate to be had about what constitutes ‘successful’ integration, given concerns about, for example, preserving Native American culture. The question of immigration has raised wider concerns about the nature of American identity. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011 Page 42 Mark Scheme: Teachers’ version Pre-U – May/June 2011 Syllabus 9769 Paper 03 38 To what extent have US politics in the twentieth century been shaped by Christian ideas and organisations? Candidates should: AO1 – present a response to the question which displays accurate and relevant historical knowledge. A sharp focus on the demands of the question is required: this is a huge question, with all sorts of legitimate approaches within it; stronger candidates will shape the material confidently. A chronological approach is acceptable but the stronger candidates will have the ability to select relevant issues and events. Attention to the rhetoric of US politicians will provide some evidence. Reagan’s use of the term ‘evil empire’, for example, suggests that he saw the Cold War in loosely religious terms as a struggle between Christian good and atheistic evil. The various ‘moral crusades’ of the twentieth century, such as Prohibition and the McCarthyite witchhunt were, in part, inspired religious attitudes. However, some presidents, such as the Roman Catholic JFK, tried to avoid letting their religion be seen to affect their policies. The politics of Martin Luther King and the critical role of the Baptist Church is also relevant, as is the rise of the Christian Right in the 1980s. Stronger answers will display an ability to range widely whilst keeping the precise question under scrutiny. AO2 – be able to demonstrate an understanding and awareness of historical concepts, such as evangelical, protestant and moral crusade. The fact that the question refers to ideas and organisations should be noted and candidates should show an awareness of both aspects. Candidates should present clear, focused and analytical explanations, which are capable of weighing up the relevant and relative factors and approaches, and arriving at a well-considered judgement. Where appropriate, attempts to deal with historiography, critical evaluation of source material and of differing historical interpretations may enhance responses. It could be argued that most US presidents have adopted a moral rhetoric and that this, in part, derives from the influence of Christianity, but alternatively it might be argued that notions of freedom and democracy, central to much of American political rhetoric, are not necessarily ‘religious’. Indeed, it might be argued that America’s ideology in the twentieth century was often secular and liberal. Stronger answers will explore and exploit the various possible ways in which this question can be interpreted. AO3 [not applicable to Outlines] AO4 – write in a coherent, structured and effective way. The writing should show a sense both of organisation and direction, displaying clarity, balance and – especially in stronger candidates – fluency. Candidates will not be penalised for specific deficiencies in spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, the cumulative effect of substantial problems in this area will inevitably influence judgements concerning the overall clarity and effectiveness of the presentation. © University of Cambridge International Examinations 2011